Latest news with #Dande
Time of India
21-04-2025
- Health
- Time of India
Divorced woman seeking surrogacy referred to SC
Mumbai: Bombay high court on Monday directed that a 36-year-old divorced mother, who is medically unable to bear a child anymore, may approach Supreme Court where a similar issue of single women seeking permission for surrogacy is pending. The high court said the issue raised by the woman, of enabling her as a single woman to opt for surrogacy, raised larger issues when the law specifically made no mention of such a provision. Allowing her plea to go in for surrogacy, just as an 'intending couple' may, could lead to unwanted repercussions which the law intended to prevent—commercialisation of the process, the high court remarked orally. The woman's counsel, Tejesh Dande, arguing before a division bench of Justices Girish Kulkarni and Advait Sethna, said since her uterus was removed, she can no longer bear a baby, and her two children from a previous marriage are in their father's custody. Dande said she may be permitted to take the surrogacy route to motherhood again, since she didn't intend to marry again. The high court, hearing the matter in the morning, said the interest of a child, once born through surrogacy, also has to be considered, not only that of the woman. "There are a child's rights too. You cannot think only of your rights as a woman,'' Justice Kulkarni orally remarked during the hearing. Dande said her plea was rejected as she didn't fall under the 'intending woman' category under the Surrogacy Act. The Act allows a widow or divorcee to opt for surrogacy if she does not have any surviving child or if such a child has a life-threatening condition. Hers was a special condition, hence he sought the high court's intervention. In the morning session, the high court asked Dande and the Centre's lawyer, Y R Mishra, to inform what similar cases are pending before Supreme Court on the issue, in the post-lunch session. Dande cited two cases pending on the single woman issue before Supreme Court, and the high court adjourned the matter sine die and said she could intervene in the matter before Supreme Court. Supreme Court has petitions seeking clarification on definition of "intending woman" to know if a single unmarried woman is covered. The bench said, "We can't read 'intending couple' who are allowed surrogacy under certain conditions, to mean 'intending woman'. Reading something into the section is impermissible unless you can show what the legislation intended." Dande said her plea was rejected since she didn't meet the "intending woman" definition under Surrogacy Act. A woman is ineligible for surrogacy if she has a living child from a previous marriage, the Act says.
Indian Express
21-04-2025
- Health
- Indian Express
Bombay HC says allowing divorced woman's surrogacy plea may have ‘repercussions' like ‘commercialisation', refuses interim relief
The Bombay High Court on Monday, while hearing a plea by a nearly 38-year-old divorced woman seeking to have a child through surrogacy, said granting relief to her may have wider 'repercussions' and questioned whether a single woman was entitled to have a child through surrogacy. The HC said it had to also consider rights of the child born and not just of the woman and wondered if granting interim relief to the woman, whose plea was rejected by the civil surgeon of a district hospital, would lead to 'commercialisation of surrogacy'. However, after it was pointed out that the larger issue of whether a single woman can avail surrogacy was pending before the Supreme Court, the HC said it was unable to grant interim relief and adjourned the proceedings till sine die and suggested the petitioner approach the SC. A division bench of Justices Girish S Kulkarni and Advait M Sethna was hearing a plea for surrogacy by the woman whose two children are in custody of their father. Advocate Tejesh Dande, representing the woman, submitted that in 2012, she had undergone 'hysterectomy', and her uterus was removed. In 2017, she got divorced by mutual consent, however both children are in the custody of their father and she has not had access to them since 2017 and 'does not have any mother-child relation' with them. Dande said the petitioner is staying alone after divorce and being a working woman, she is capable of maintaining herself. He added that even though her uterus has been removed due to medical complications, she is capable of using her own eggs for surrogacy. Dande further said that as she desired for 'motherhood', she consulted her doctor for having a child through assisted reproductive techniques (ART), however, due to removal of uterus, the doctor suggested her surrogacy. In 2023, after examining her, the director of a private hospital wrote to the civil surgeon of the district hospital with a request to issue a certificate of medical indication to the petitioner to allow her to undergo the consequential procedures required for surrogacy. Earlier this month, as per HC directions, the medical board of the district hospital examined her and the civil surgeon held that the petitioner was 'not ineligible' for surrogacy. The district hospital referred to Section 4(iii)(a) of the Surrogacy (Regulation) Act 2021, which stipulated that any intending couple or intending woman is eligible to avail surrogacy only if they have no surviving child — biological, adopted, or born through surrogacy. As per the law, an exception is made in case the existing child is suffering from a life-threatening disease, physically or mentally challenged. The district hospital said in the present case the petitioner had two living and healthy biological children from previous marriage and 'custody status or remarriage does not negate her ineligibility under the Act'. When the matter came up for hearing during the pre-lunch session, the bench questioned what happens if in future an unmarried couple seeks to go for surrogacy but later they separate and if the same was the intention of the legislation. 'Whether such parenting is permissible? Who will be the father of the child?… This may lead to commercialisation of surrogacy. You want surrogacy as you are not capable of bearing a child… There are rights of the child once born too and we cannot just think about the woman's rights… It is a larger issue. The case may be genuine but look at the repercussions. You have to consider all this,' the bench orally remarked. After it was informed that the SC was seized of the 'larger issue', the HC said it was 'unable to grant interim relief'. It suggested the petitioner approach the SC. It granted liberty to the woman to apply to the HC again after the SC decision.
